Anglo Pay Raises

[DerKaiser]

Just wondering about people's views on this.

There have been a large number of redundancies (and probably will be more after the NAMA transfers) and restructuring at Anglo.

There's surely a small identifiable number of people with added responsibilities working harder than ever before as a result. What exactly is the fuss around increasing their pay if they are now doing a much more onerous job?

People seem to have a problem with it. I personally have no problem seeing those working much harder getting paid better, particulary when people are being let go in significant numbers.

Or are there people who believe no one should get a pay raise in this climate. My view is that this is silly as it would merely act as a disincentive to get the head down and work through the crisis if the diligent are to be treated the same way as the not so diligent.

 

[RonanC]

Just wondering about people's views on this.

There have been a large number of redundancies (and probably will be more after the NAMA transfers) and restructuring at Anglo.

There's surely a small identifiable number of people with added responsibilities working harder than ever before as a result. What exactly is the fuss around increasing their pay if they are now doing a much more onerous job?

People seem to have a problem with it. I personally have no problem seeing those working much harder getting paid better, particulary when people are being let go in significant numbers.

Or are there people who believe no one should get a pay raise in this climate. My view is that this is silly as it would merely act as a disincentive to get the head down and work through the crisis if the diligent are to be treated the same way as the not so diligent.

My problem is, there are thousands in the Public Sector and maybe more in the Private Sector who have taken large pay cuts and asked to do more work and take on more responsibilities. Now as a Public Servant I am being told that my pay is being cut because the country cant afford to pay me, but here is a Bank that is about to post record losses yet it can give pay rises to certain staff. And this Bank has been already bailed out by you and me the taxpayer.

This is disgraceful !

 

[Shawady]

Or are there people who believe no one should get a pay raise in this climate.

I think the issue with Anglo is that it is fully owned by the taxpayer and as has been stated on other threads relating to public sector pay and welfare payments, the money isn't there anymore.
We don't know the amounts involved and it may be a drop in the ocean, but it just gives amunition to people that think there are different rules for different sectors in society.

 

[Purple]

If it is reasonable to say that public sector employees shouldn’t get pay rises because their employer (the state) can’t afford to pay them then I don’t see why the same should not apply for a state owned bank which is also broke.

 

[liaconn]

Loads of public sector workers are now being asked to take on extra work and more responsibilities without being given new job titles and the pay that goes with those titles. Anglo Irish is being shored up by taxpayers money and its staff should be treated exactly the same as public sector workers

 

[Firefly]

Anglo Irish is being shored up by taxpayers money and its staff should be treated exactly the same as public sector workers

We'd need to know more about who exactly is getting a pay rise. The goal of the government is not to retain ownership of Anglo. Hence, if key/good staff are not adequalty compensated then they may either leave or not work as hard at rebuilding this bank. The end result would be a longer stint in giovernment control.

 

[Caveat]

If it is reasonable to say that public sector employees shouldn’t get pay rises because their employer (the state) can’t afford to pay them then I don’t see why the same should not apply for a state owned bank which is also broke.

I agree.

 

[SteveW9]

i agree.

+ 2

 

[StevieC]

I think the key point is that these are not pay raises. They are promotions or educational awards.

If someone in the civil/public service at managerial level retires and someone else takes on their job, then they get promoted. The increase in pay isnt an increase for doing more work, its an increase for getting a new job with more responsibility. The vast majority of Anglo staff are being asked to do more work for the same pay and are happy to do it as they are grateful to still have a job. I know people who work in Anglo (low level) and they dont complain at all about the extra work they are being asked to do and are doing overtime for free.

In relation to the educational awards, its the same in every industry, for example; an apprentice plumber will be paid less than a fully qualified plumber, once they qualify a new rate applies.

Overall the wage bill for Anglo has significantly decreased as 1 in 7 of the staff have been made redundant. The difference with the public service is that staff are not being made redundant and the wage bill has not been slashed like Anglo (except through pay cuts). If the public service cut staff by 1 in 7, I'm sure there would be scope for less pay cuts/pay rises too.

Its very easy to hear "Anglo Staff get pay rises" and get all hot and bothered about it, I did when I initially heard about it, but when I realised that in the overall scheme of things, the wage bill has been significantly reduced due to redundancy and that the rises had legitimate reasons for giving them, I realised that this is just the media and the likes of Joan Burton trying to score points against the government.

 

[RonanC]

There is an embargo on promotions in the Public and Civil Service. If somebody retires, the position is left vacant and everyone around must take on extra work load for the same (sorry less pay)

 

[StevieC]

There is an embargo on promotions in the Public and Civil Service. If somebody retires, the position is left vacant and everyone around must take on extra work load for the same (sorry less pay)

When the embargo is gone, someone will get a promotion and more pay. The only difference is that the government can make Anglo workers redundant (which they have) where as they can't make public sector workers redundant. Quoting retirements is comparing apples and oranges as due to the nature of the public service, a retirement actually saves the government hardly any money as they still have the pay the retirees pension and when the embargo is gone another person to do the work. A redundancy by an Anglo worker on the other hand actually saves the government a lot of money as they are off the wage bill and their pension is paid for by the company pension scheme at the time the person reaches retirement age.

 

[RonanC]

StevieC

Anglo Irish Bank have no money, they have been bailed out by the taxpayer. Shareholders lost everything. And now they want another €6bn and also give staff payrises (or promotions as you put it)

 

[StevieC]

StevieC

Anglo Irish Bank have no money, they have been bailed out by the taxpayer. Shareholders lost everything. And now they want another €6bn and also give staff payrises (or promotions as you put it)

1) Government made decision to bail them out as the cost to the economy would be more to have let them fail and go bust.

2) They have reduced their wage costs overall.

Perhaps we should just brand them and bring in a law that prevents them from ever getting a pay rise again as in 5 years time the shareholders will still have lost everything and they will still have gotten 6 billion of tax payers money to recapitalise them.

If the general public ever want to see a return from the government taking over Anglo then they need to make it a viable business again and sell it at some point in the future. This means cutting costs in Anglo (which they have done) and hanging on to whatever talent they have (which they are trying to do).

Anglo staff even if they are defacto owned by the government are not public service staff. They dont have public service job security or public service pensions. If they had both of those then yes I can see why they should be treated the exact same as the public service... but they dont.

 

[csirl]

When the embargo is gone, someone will get a promotion and more pay.

And when Anglo pays back its debts to the taxpayer and starts making a profit, then they can give the staff a pay rise.

 

[DerKaiser]

There is an embargo on promotions in the Public and Civil Service. If somebody retires, the position is left vacant and everyone around must take on extra work load for the same (sorry less pay)

Point is I don't agree with these types of embargo in any organisation.

Which system is better:

1) No pay raises or redundancies with some people working much harder whilst others do the same, or

2) Pay raises linked to extra responsibility with redundancies of unnecessary staff.

The second point makes the organisation more efficient as it rewards productive staff and reduces overall costs.

Can anyone bring themselves to see this point amidst all the emotive discussion?

 

[DerKaiser]

StevieC

Anglo Irish Bank have no money, they have been bailed out by the taxpayer. Shareholders lost everything. And now they want another €6bn and also give staff payrises (or promotions as you put it)

A simple point that needs to be reiterated often is that the primary beneficiaries of the so called bailout are the ordinary depositors.

In the event of no bail out the developers are still in the same position (i.e. bust) but there would be no cash to return to depositors.

The taxpayer is primarily coughing up to ensure depositors do not lose their deposits.

A futher point is that it is correct that the shareholders lose everything. They were the banks. They were responsible for the board, the strategic direction of the bank and hence the entire crisis. If you put money into AIB or BOI shares you willingly endorsed the direction they took.

The hierarchy of who should bear the losses is as follows:

Developers
Bank Shareholders
Depositors and Bondholders

What has happened is that the developers and bank shareholders are all but wiped out.

The 'bail out' so often referred to is the taxpayer bailing out the depositor/bondholder.

 

[bogle]

Kieran Mulvey appalled by Anglo pay increases...

from RTE web site

"Chief Executive of the Labour Relations Commission Kieran Mulvey has said pay increases at Anglo Irish Bank create an appalling vista and difficulty in the context of the negotiations he is involved with.
Speaking at the Public Affairs Ireland Conference in Dublin he said nobody accepts or understands the rationale.
He said pay increases are few and far between at the moment, and in the past year he has only been involved with three areas where increases were awarded."


It's on the RTE 9 o clocknews as well.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0324/banks.html

 

[MandaC]

I have been at a Five Star Hotel once in February and once again in March.

Was having a chat with the porter, porter told me that business had picked up, the Banks, etc were coming back, but that they did not want their names on the welcome board in case of bad publicity.

Second time, last week, must have forgotten about the bad publicity and sure enough name was up on the Board.

 

[StevieC]

Would he care if it wasnt making his job harder? The cynic in me thinks not.

Also the payrises he is talking about are like the ones in the ESB, payrises for doing the same job as the people did the year before, not where people have taken on new positions to fill redundancies.

If outsiders were hired to fill redundancies at lower pay to the person that left and a saving was made, then there wouldnt be a problem. Why then if an internal staff member gets a rise to do a more difficult job at probably less pay than the person who left is it a problem?

I never thought I'd say it but I am behind Alan Dukes on this one, let him manage Anglo and get the company working properly again so it will be floggable at some point in the future and we the tax payers can get some money back on the bailout.

 

[Mpsox]

Personnally speaking I'm working harder with more responsibility and fewer staff since the recession started, and have taken a pay cut. I'm not saying I have an issue with that, after all, no one wants to have to take a paycut, but I also know that in the long term, if it helps in any small way to ensure the survival of my employer and keeps me in a job, it's the best thing to do.

Right now, Anglo doesn't have the money to spend on payrises. If their current financial situation means their staff have to work harder, tough, that's life. If at somestage in the future they return to profitability and are making a return to the state then fine, then consider a return to payrises and bonues. If they are not returned to profitabilty in a reasonable term, close them down and then no one will have to worry about rises